Domestic violence

Feminist ideology and the effect it has had upon society
About this forum
This is an example of one thread - Feminism - which has recently been turned into its own subforum. Thus we are currently breaking that very interesting, but very long, thread into sub-discussions where appropriate. This will leave the original thread with a lot of views while the new threads will apparently have fewer. They'll begin to catch up though.

Domestic violence

Postby Gavin » 18 Jun 2013, 08:35

Domestic violence is something that can be perpetrated by women as well as men. It is a crime from one person to another and should have nothing to do with "feminism".

Indeed when it is perpetrated by women, throwing things and attacking, it can be hard for the man to respond because he could easily hurt the woman, he would more than likely lose the court case, and it can be embarrassing for him to discuss it.

This established, I will put this topic here (for now), to satisfy any feminists reading and make sure they notice it.

Charles Saatchi made many millions from twisting the truth for a living throughout the eigthies and nineties and then went on to finance the rubbish artists Tracey Emin and Damien Hirst. A very guilty man already, one would think.

He always came across to me as odious individual (and I did a placement inside Saatchi & Saatchi). I have often wondered why on earth Nigella Lawson married him - maybe because he too is a Jew. Previously she had apparently a very genuine and loving relationship with reporter John Diamond - just a normal man. Of course Saatchi is a multimillionaire and that may have tempted her, but she showed herself be someone with the sense not to select on this basis with Diamond. I sometimes wonder if Diamond appealed to her on his deathbed "Just choose someone with money" or something. But she could have had almost anyone with money, not him. Or, given the charms nature bestowed upon her and her fine schooling, she could easily have made money herself - and has indeed made a lot - perhaps even more admirably by showing how to be a good housewife.

Saatchi has just been photographed in public with his hand around his wife's throat. She looks very upset and distressed and I cannot see any reason why a man would ever do this. Women can goad a man, they can deliberately belittle him provoke him, but I doubt this was the case here, and anyway in such a case the man should just walk away (permanently, if this is a pattern, I think).

Luckily Nigella Lawson seems to have left Saatchi. These pictures do make one wonder how he treated her inside the home.
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Domestic violence

Postby Gavin » 18 Jun 2013, 08:49

This issue was discussed on the radio and all of the "experts" (females) took the line of the Lawrence Inquiry that domestic violence (or abuse) was being committed "if the person felt it was".

Dalrymple took this fallacious, Orwellian definition to task in at least one article (maybe someone can find a link). It is not the way to go about diagnosing things in my view. An outside party can identify whether or not something is violent or abusive - it doesn't depend on the perceptions of the subject.
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Domestic violence

Postby Michael » 18 Jun 2013, 15:16

An outside party can identify whether or not something is violent or abusive - it doesn't depend on the perceptions of the subject.


This is the purpose of grand jury inquiries - a group of citizens is called to judge, based on the evidence available, whether a crime has been committed and should go to trial. Criminality is held to be identifiable independent of what the perpetrator or victim may think.
Michael
 
Posts: 304
Joined: 01 Aug 2011, 21:28
Location: Canada

Re: Domestic violence

Postby Heather » 18 Jun 2013, 20:45

Speaking of female-perpetrated domestic violence, I actually think it's entirely appropriate to put it under the feminism forum.

My aunt was an average gen X small town career girl. She claimed to hate feminism, but she was a feminist in the default way that nearly every woman is. She'd been promised a lot: a high-flying career, a doting husband who would split the housework 50/50, sweet children, a nice house and lavish vacations. Slowly, reality hit, and she found herself in a cubicle, a replaceable and untalented office drone. She'd come home to a disaster of a house, children who were emotionally estranged from her, a mountain of debts from their latest toys, and a husband who'd also been at work all day and would rather tune her out than listen to her latest feminist-inspired complaints. She deeply resented how he didn't care as much as she did about having a clean house, good meals, and spending time with the kids, and how it was her career that suffered from maternity leave and the normal tasks of motherhood. That's a very stressful life to live, and she dealt with it the way feminists do: by directing the anger at men.

She'd occasionally get so blindingly furious with her husband that she'd attack him, at a level that would have had any female victim calling the police, but given their size and strength differences, really did no damage to him. The thing is, she always did it in front of other people, like my family and me, and their own daughters would giggle helplessly to watch little mommy slap around bear-sized daddy (those kids are college-aged now, and I often wonder what sort of relationships they'll get into in the coming years). Surely my aunt knew in the back of her mind, behind all the rage, that she wasn't truly hurting him, and that he could utterly destroy her if he chose to - I think it was a sick power game on her part, a show for us onlookers, with the only goal being his humiliation, a very feminist thing.
Heather
 
Posts: 132
Joined: 28 Apr 2012, 23:05
Location: The American South

Re: Domestic violence

Postby Gavin » 21 Dec 2013, 18:03

On this particular story, did anybody else find the verdict strange? There are a few things that don't add up for me:

  • Why did Nigella Lawson (a woman who could have had almost anyone) marry the obviously unlikeable Saatchi in the first place? She seems like a nice person. Was it for money? She was already a millionaire and could have married another male millionaire if that was her criterion. Was it because he is a Jew? If so, she could have found another Jew. What did she expect, marrying him? It can hardly have been love. Maybe she got what she deserved. It even occurred to me, as I racked my brains, that she might have been blackmailed into marrying him.
  • Why would the Saatchis have brought this case against these two sisters if it wasn't true that they had stolen from them, if there were no grounds to suppose or show this? I found it very strange that the sisters, with their supposed health issues, were exonerated.
  • Why did the police decide not to investigate Nigella Lawson when she actually admitted in court to cocaine use?! They could, at least get her to explain where she acquired the class A drugs so that they can bring down her dealer. What on earth is going on?

Just PC as usual, I suppose.
Gavin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3430
Joined: 27 Jul 2011, 18:13
Location: Once Great Britain

Re: Domestic violence

Postby Elliott » 21 Dec 2013, 18:44

I read an article somewhere which said that Nigella Lawson had a miserable childhood with a mother who was overbearing and cruel, almost sadistic, towards her. The article theorised that, accustomed to this treatment, she sought out a man in later life who would treat her in an equally overbearing and cruel manner.

That article was written before the cocaine revelations emerged, and they cast a different light on the infamous photos of Saatchi "intimidating" Lawson at a restaurant: it now looks as if he was scolding her for her addiction to cocaine.

I don't know what to believe and I don't care about it, to be honest. To me, Nigella Lawson is a good woman who has done a lot of good for the world, and I hate to see her being dragged through the dirt by an exploitative media. Having a cocaine addiction, if she does have one, doesn't seem as important as generally making people happy with her books and TV shows and presenting an ideal of womanhood that is worth aspiring to (whether or not she achieved the ideal herself).
Elliott
 
Posts: 1800
Joined: 31 Jul 2011, 22:32
Location: Edinburgh


Return to Feminism

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

User Menu

Login Form

This site costs £100 per year to run and makes no money.

If you would like to make a small contribution to help pay for the web hosting, you can do so here.

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 175 on 12 Jan 2015, 18:23

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
Copyright © Western Defence. All Rights Reserved.